TY - JOUR
T1 - Best practices for endoscopic ultrasound–guided gastroenterostomy
T2 - technical recommendations from an international modified Delphi process
AU - Vanella, Giuseppe
AU - Leone, Roberto
AU - Frigo, Francesco
AU - Bronswijk, Michiel
AU - van Wanrooij, Roy L.J.
AU - Chen, Yen I.
AU - Binmoeller, Kenneth F.
AU - Perez-Miranda, Manuel
AU - Chahal, Prabhleen
AU - Jovani, Manol
AU - Tyberg, Amy
AU - Pérez-Cuadrado-Robles, Enrique
AU - Barthet, Marc
AU - Deprez, Pierre
AU - Kahaleh, Michel
AU - Adler, Douglas G.
AU - Khashab, Mouen
AU - Teoh, Anthony Y.B.
AU - Itoi, Takao
AU - Lakhtakia, Sundeep
AU - Kunda, Rastislav
AU - Van der Merwe, Schalk
AU - Arcidiacono, Paolo Giorgio
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
PY - 2026/5
Y1 - 2026/5
N2 - Background and Aims EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) increasingly has been adopted for gastric outlet obstruction, yet significant technical variability exists, which might account for heterogeneous clinical outcomes. The aim of this initiative was to gather expert consensus on key aspects and open questions of EUS-GE. Methods A total of 25 international leading experts in EUS-GE participated in a modified Delphi process over 3 rounds, involving anonymous voting on 35 predefined statements, using a 5-point Likert scale. Statements were approved, revised, or discarded on the basis of predefined median [IQR] thresholds; for approved statements, the strength of the agreement was determined by the proportion of responses rated 4 or 5. Results rate was 88% in round 1 and 100% in rounds 2 to 3. Thirty-one statements were approved, whereas 4 were ultimately rejected. Early and very strong agreement (>95%) was reached on the need for fluoroscopy, free-hand release of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent, and need for competence in managing perforations, bleedings, dysfunctions, and (after more extensive discussion) misdeployments. Final strong agreement (>90%) was reached on sedation regimen, preferred patient positioning, and saline as distending solution. Extensive discussion with final moderate agreement (>80%) was reached on the use of dye, the preference for catheter-assisted EUS-GE instead of endoscope- or needle-directed instillation, the typical location for EUS-GE, and the operative space required for lumen-apposing metal stent release. Statements on the use of contrast and the choice between specific techniques were removed because of a lack of agreement. Conclusions Despite technical differences (such as the preference of a jejunal catheter or a double-balloon catheter), most experts in EUS-GE agree on key technical principles, providing valuable guidance on the standardization of EUS-GE in clinical practice. Conversely, certain topics show limited agreement, identifying future research priorities in the field of EUS-GE.
AB - Background and Aims EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) increasingly has been adopted for gastric outlet obstruction, yet significant technical variability exists, which might account for heterogeneous clinical outcomes. The aim of this initiative was to gather expert consensus on key aspects and open questions of EUS-GE. Methods A total of 25 international leading experts in EUS-GE participated in a modified Delphi process over 3 rounds, involving anonymous voting on 35 predefined statements, using a 5-point Likert scale. Statements were approved, revised, or discarded on the basis of predefined median [IQR] thresholds; for approved statements, the strength of the agreement was determined by the proportion of responses rated 4 or 5. Results rate was 88% in round 1 and 100% in rounds 2 to 3. Thirty-one statements were approved, whereas 4 were ultimately rejected. Early and very strong agreement (>95%) was reached on the need for fluoroscopy, free-hand release of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent, and need for competence in managing perforations, bleedings, dysfunctions, and (after more extensive discussion) misdeployments. Final strong agreement (>90%) was reached on sedation regimen, preferred patient positioning, and saline as distending solution. Extensive discussion with final moderate agreement (>80%) was reached on the use of dye, the preference for catheter-assisted EUS-GE instead of endoscope- or needle-directed instillation, the typical location for EUS-GE, and the operative space required for lumen-apposing metal stent release. Statements on the use of contrast and the choice between specific techniques were removed because of a lack of agreement. Conclusions Despite technical differences (such as the preference of a jejunal catheter or a double-balloon catheter), most experts in EUS-GE agree on key technical principles, providing valuable guidance on the standardization of EUS-GE in clinical practice. Conversely, certain topics show limited agreement, identifying future research priorities in the field of EUS-GE.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105030624394
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105030624394#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2025.10.026
DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2025.10.026
M3 - Article
C2 - 41115478
AN - SCOPUS:105030624394
SN - 0016-5107
VL - 103
SP - 978-993.e19
JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
IS - 5
ER -